the ever shifting stable loaded with comfortable road bikes and city and winter bikes

Posts

18,026

Mentioned

0 Post(s)

Tagged

0 Thread(s)

Originally Posted by Brontide

Huh? How can it be unjust if they were breaking the law Bek?

no bicyclist in any state is required to place themselves in danger to comply with a traffic law like mandatory bikelane use. if it isn't safe you can't operate a vehicle there, nor would any traffic code endanger said cyclist.

uneforceable, brontide. bicyclists are not required to endanger themselves, and can legally ride to avoid hazards in the bikelane in every state.

"Evidence, anecdote and methodology all support planning for roadway bike traffic."

The Officer never told Neistat "he's not allowed to ride outside the bike lane". It was the filmmakers text that makes that statement. Neistat is the one with the agenda in this case. Parts of it are factual, but parts of it were made to get his point across.

lil brown bat wrote:

Wow, aren't other people stupid? It's a good thing that we're so smart. Yay us.

right. this video wasn't about helmets, it was about unjust enforcement in the crackdown of 2011 on bicyclists breaking the law in new york city.

the NYPD needs bicycle awareness training. who's working on implementing this in NYC?

Bek all you need to do is read the comments and you'll see a good number of people arguing things like this guy:

@raisinsunn you're dumb..hes not getting fined for not polluting..hes being fined for not being in the bike lane..and if he doesnt wear a helmet then how the **** can he complain about the bike lane not being safe..no **** it aint safe if you don't got a helmet on..bikers have a terrible attitude where they think they own the road..there are awful in Toronto and﻿ i can only assume its atleast 10 times worse in NYC
JacoblCanada 8 hours ago

Helmet use and bikelane use have a common motivation: fear.

Fear of riding in traffic, fear of riding full stop.

The promotion of bikelanes and bicycle helmets most likely serves to aid in reinforcing that fear and confirming to the non-cycling majority that bicycling is a foolhardy pursuit and that cyclists get what's coming to them when some numbnut not paying attention runs them down.

It's all part of FEAR. A fear which, sadly, many bike activists are busy spreading.

no bicyclist in any state is required to place themselves in danger to comply with a traffic law like mandatory bikelane use. if it isn't safe you can't operate a vehicle there, nor would any traffic code endanger said cyclist.

uneforceable, brontide. bicyclists are not required to endanger themselves, and can legally ride to avoid hazards in the bikelane in every state.

Several commentators on the YouTube video said something along the lines of: "OK, if the bikelane is blocked then you should get off your bicycle and walk it along the sidewalk until you can get back on." The cop can argue the same thing.

Once you've thrown away your _current_ right to the road by lobbying for bikelanes then you can be sure that we (cyclists) are going to get crap facilities with crap rules attached to them. That's what you bikelane lobbyists don't get: bicycling already has an _enviable_ position under the law and if you starting fugging around with it then, as a minority that is detested by other road users, we can expect to end up in a worse position.

no bicyclist in any state is required to place themselves in danger to comply with a traffic law like mandatory bikelane use. if it isn't safe you can't operate a vehicle there, nor would any traffic code endanger said cyclist.

But FRAP doesn't require a cyclist to ride in a blocked or unsafe lane, so riding in the lane would be 100% legal, no? This is what you argue in other thread. This is an illegal crackdown on a legal behavior.

"My two favourite things in life are libraries and bicycles. They both move people forward without wasting anything" -Peter Golkin
[SIGPIC]http://www.wulffmorgenthaler.com/striphandler.ashx?stripid=57f6ca71-73a8-42a3-acc4-29e6d333df27[/SIGPIC]

Depending on where on the DOT site you look there are more verbose answers which make much more sense. This is also in line with New York VTL. Bike lanes are technically compulsory, but the statute give cyclist many exceptions under which travel in the lane is permissible.

Ride on the street, not on the sidewalks (unless rider is age 12 or younger and the bicycle's wheels are less than 26 inches in diameter).

Ride with traffic, not against it.

Obey all traffic signals, signs and pavement markings. Cyclists must come to a complete stop at red lights and stop signs. Cyclists are required by law to exercise due care to avoid colliding with pedestrians, motor vehicles or other cyclists.

Use marked bike lanes or paths when available, except when making turns or when it is unsafe to do so, etc. If the road is too narrow for a bicycle and a car to travel safely side by side, cyclists have the right to ride in the middle of the travel lane.

Bicycling is permitted on all main and local streets throughout the City even when no designated route exists.

Not wear more than one earphone attached to an aud io device (e.g. radio, ipod, walkman)

Use the following safety and visibility equipment:
* White headlight and red taillight must be used from dusk to dawn
* Bell or horn (not whistle)
* Working brakes
* Reflective tires or reflectors
* Helmets must be worn by children age 13 or younger, and helmets are strongly recommended for all others.

A defendant would have to prove it's safer outside the lane than in, if he was caught outside of it, not making a turn, etc, etc.

"My two favourite things in life are libraries and bicycles. They both move people forward without wasting anything" -Peter Golkin
[SIGPIC]http://www.wulffmorgenthaler.com/striphandler.ashx?stripid=57f6ca71-73a8-42a3-acc4-29e6d333df27[/SIGPIC]

We've had a number of threads here about people being "busted" for video taping the police and other security personal. While I/we agree that it should be legal to do so. Even in those areas where it is legal LEOs will still try to intimidate the photographer into deleting their video/pictures, confiscating their equipment or just generally harassing people until they (the LEOs) get what they want.

We've seen footage that later cleared innocents of the charges that LEOs have tried to press.

"If they're not doing anything wrong, they shouldn't have to worry about it".

This is why services like this one: http://qik.com/ are very handy. Even if the jackboot steals your phone/camera/other or forces you to delete content, it's still on the internet. Smile for the camera, piggies...

And another one: some folks have taken to adding a single frame to their camera the looks just like a normal LCD display saying "No Data" or some such... show the thug that frame only and he'll think you deleted evidence of his crimes when in reality, you still have it ready to send to the internet/media/etc...

I just cannot fathom that any city's PD would be foolish enough to set up such a deliberate sting operation that is so paper thin to even hold up in court.

Oh ya? Well, according to the OP, he paid the fine without contesting it!

That is exactly what many police do. I had a cop try to give me a ticket for speeding. I insisted that I was not speeding and he said, "oh really, do you want to see the radar?" To his surprise, I said "Yes". When he showed me, I noticed that the time on the radar "***" showing the illegal speed was from nearly an hour earlier. When I pointed it out, he let me go, but it goes to show that some cops are out to write tickets with the expectation that you won't contest it and just pay the fine.

In some cities, cops get commissions and have quotas for writing fines.

He's merely asking for what the opinions of subscribers think about the video and about how/where they ride if they do. May not be a direct reply, but hell, at least someone fairly well known took notice. It will make people think about cyclists a bit more. I'm sorry my reply wasn't spot on. I'm sorry I didn't give a 100% correct response. geez.

what the hell was the point of that video? There was zero information and literally nothing happened in it to warrant the label "response".

he did say that the cyclist was in the right by showing footage of him crashing into obstacles that are in bike lanes, but the law says you can leave the bike lane for "safety"

we don't know what the situation was when he got the ticket. He could have just been riding down the street with the lane with no obstacles in it next to him.

BC used to have a law like this, but it was removed. It's much better now. You can use it or not

"My two favourite things in life are libraries and bicycles. They both move people forward without wasting anything" -Peter Golkin
[SIGPIC]http://www.wulffmorgenthaler.com/striphandler.ashx?stripid=57f6ca71-73a8-42a3-acc4-29e6d333df27[/SIGPIC]

As It Happens interviewed the author of the video. Go to this link and click Listen to Part 2. The interview is a 16:45.

Thanks for the link akohekohe . This is a filmmaker making a movie. The only things known for sure is that he was ticketed for riding outside the bike lane & that there are obstructions in NYC bike lanes.

Due to editing we don't know if Neistat was ticketed or pulled over for other things. Also, the Cop never stated that Neistat can only ride in bike lanes.

Neistat made a movie loosely based on an encounter with an officer and an extreme (albeit incorrect) interpretation of NYC bike lane law.

Neistat is and wants to be a filmmaker. As a filmmaker he took liberties in the design and editing of his film. He made a movie in his own words "that would be funny and might get some attention". Neistat accomplished goal .

lil brown bat wrote:

Wow, aren't other people stupid? It's a good thing that we're so smart. Yay us.